In our Literature class we have been studying and analyzing “Evening in paradise”. We made a slideshare, and our teacher gave us some tasks for us to do.

Task 1

The first 12 lines show an analogy between evening and paradise. The writes expresses that night is beautiful, it’s the time when you rest, when you are at peace. This description of the night is used to explain heaven, paradise. Both have similar features, such as resting, being at peace, being beautiful, and so the explanation of the evening is used to compare and explain heaven too; that’s why it is said to be an analogy.

-Analogy: It’s a comparison between things that have similar features, often used to help explain a principle or idea. In “Evening in paradise” the analogy carries the message. It carries the most important and crucial part. This being that the evening equals heaven/paradise; and that working in life brings peaceful nights, after a hole life working comes paradise.

-Images: The writer uses images and a specific diction of nature so as to portray the message and the analogy of the story. Such images of nature, of night and of day, call our attention and makes us stop and focus on them.

Task 4

No, the scene is not portrayed as a natural scene and it could be a funeral scene. This is dude to the portrayal of a situation in which the evening and the night is described so much and so deeply through the use of images and specific diction in connection to death, darkness, afterworld.

In our Literature class, with Pato, we read Virginia Woolf’s novel “The Lady in the Looking-Glass: a Reflection”. We analyzed it and took down notes. Then we made groups and chose quotations for different parts of the story and for the themes.

This is an assignlent our Literature teacher usked us to do. We have to choose a stanza or set of lines of a poem analysed in class and show the connection with the hypothesis we elaborated in class, which is: “These poems share a criticism to the industrial, urban, rational and bellicose society of the 18th century”.

I chose this line from “Soldier, rest”: “Huntsman rest! thy chase is done”

I believe this is a clear example of the criticism shown towards the industrial, urban, rational and bellicose society of the 18th century because the writer is comparing a mercyless huntsman to a soldier. He criticizes the soldiers with this comparison because huntsman hunt to eat, they kill for food. It is a clear criticism to war and to people from that time, it is saying that they were going back in time, instead of going forwards.

This is the correction of the first essay we did in our Literature class so far. I worked with Gonzalo and we analysed an aspect of “The Yellow Wallpaper”.

Essay Literature – Correction

“The Yellow Wallpaper” John is the villain of the story.

In the story “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Gilman, John, the husband of the narrator, is known to be the villain. As a ‘physician of high standing’, he assures his wife is going through a nervous depression, locks her up and vetoes her wish to write and relate to other people; because he is sure this will help her recover. He trapps his wife and leaves her alone, but only for her to get better. So up to what point is he the villain? He, by definition, is not the villain, but several times throughout the story, has villany behaviours.

To begin with, we know for certain, that John, through his knowledge as a physician, does what he thinks is best for his wife’s health. As the narrator says at the beginning of the story, he is “practical in the extreme”, he believes isolating her wife is the solution so no matter what she says or what she does, he will not let her out of the land. He thinks what he is doing is right, and she would eventually get better, but she does not in the slightest. He uses science to try and help his wife; he is not acting as a villain, but one may think so because his actions aggravate his wife.

Furthermore, he cares deeply for the health of his wife and does what he believes is right for her. Despite this, he can not help her at all simply because he does not think he needs the opinion of his wife, which is his first mistake. He ignores her when she wants to express herself, when she tries to tell him what she really needs, what she really is going through “…John would not hear of it”. Without the point of view of the diseased, it is very difficult to know exactly what goes through that person’s mind and spirit. So we realize that although John has good intentions, he acts upon what he believes is right, not upon what his wife, the one who is suffering, tells him. What he does ends up harming his wife, but that is not his objective, since he is not trying to be a villain.

Despite this, we must hand it to him, he shines at some moments, and helps his wife, which he does not know mean so much for her. For example when she tried her best to express her needs but failed when she started crying uncontrollably, and then he “…gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till he tired my head”, he, without the use of medicine, did what was best for his wife. It is in this moments that we come to respect John, and we understand that everything he does, he does for his love. Therefore, he is not the villain, because he has good and caring intentions.

In contrast, the woman obeys what her husband tells her to do, and realizes he is wrong, but decides not to act upon it. She trusts him, and so she fights with herself to get better under the conditions her husband gives her, “he takes all care for me, and so I feel basely ungrateful not to value it more.”, she puts up with everything John says because she knows he wants only the best for her, and so she accepts everything, not being able to go out of the land, not being able to talk to anyone, not being able to write. She loves him, so she sticks to him, even though he is hurting her. He makes his wife suffer like hell, but she realizes, as we readers do, that he only wants what is best for her, so he must not be considered a villain.

John makes an error by using science and medicine to cure his wife, and is stubborn enough as to ignore the negative responses of his wife to his methods to cure her. He does help her at times, and that is when she realizes he, despite what is shown in his actions, has good intentions, because he loves her. She loves him too, and so she obeys him and stays by his side because she knows her husband is not a villain, but a man who lacks perspective and who believes science, medicine and reason is the answer to all the struggles in life.

In our Literature class we have been studying and analysing different poems from the romantic genre. We devided in groups and worked each group on one poem, then we did presentations and shared them in class. We compared them all and got to an interesting conclusion. I worked with Bauti, Nico and Catu. This is our presentation on the poem “Ode on Melancholy”.

This is the correction Gonzalo and I did on the essay, after checking on Ceci`s feedback. Plus, we added a conclusion following Ceci`s indications. Hope you like it!

“The Yellow Wallpaper” John is the villain of the story.

In the story “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Gilman, John, the husband of the narrator, is known to be the villain. As a ‘physician of high standing’, he assures his wife is going through a nervous depression, locks her up and vetoes her wish to write and relate to other people; because he is sure this will help her recover. He trapps his wife and leaves her alone, but only for her to get better. So up to what point is he the villain? He, by definition, is not the villain, but several times throughout the story, has villany behaviours.

To begin with, we know for certain, that John, through his knowledge as a physician, does what he thinks is best for his wife’s health. As the narrator says at the beginning of the story, he is “practical in the extreme”, he believes isolating her wife is the solution so no matter what she says or what she does, he will not let her out of the land. He thinks what he is doing is right, and she would eventually get better, but she does not in the slightest. He uses science to try and help his wife; he is not acting as a villain, but one may think so because his actions aggravate his wife.

Furthermore, he cares deeply for the health of his wife and does what he believes is right for her. Despite this, he can not help her at all simply because he does not think he needs the opinion of his wife, which is his first mistake. He ignores her when she wants to express herself, when she tries to tell him what she really needs, what she really is going through “…John would not hear of it”. Without the point of view of the diseased, it is very difficult to know exactly what goes through that person’s mind and spirit. So we realize that although John has good intentions, he acts upon what he believes is right, not upon what his wife, the one who is suffering, tells him. What he does ends up harming his wife, but that is not his objective, since he is not trying to be a villain.

Despite this, we must hand it to him, he shines at some moments, and helps his wife, which he does not know mean so much for her. For example when she tried her best to express her needs but failed when she started crying uncontrollably, and then he “…gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till he tired my head”, he, without the use of medicine, did what was best for his wife. It is in this moments that we come to respect John, and we understand that everything he does, he does for his love. Therefore, he is not the villain, because he has good and caring intentions.

In contrast, the woman obeys what her husband tells her to do, and realizes he is wrong, but decides not to act upon it. She trusts him, and so she fights with herself to get better under the conditions her husband gives her, “he takes all care for me, and so I feel basely ungrateful not to value it more.”, she puts up with everything John says because she knows he wants only the best for her, and so she accepts everything, not being able to go out of the land, not being able to talk to anyone, not being able to write. She loves him, so she sticks to him, even though he is hurting her. He makes his wife suffer like hell, but she realizes, as we readers do, that he only wants what is best for her, so he must not be considered a villain.

John makes an error by using science and medicine to cure his wife, and is stubborn enough as to ignore the negative responses of his wife to his methods to cure her. He does help her at times, and that is when she realizes he, despite what he`s actions show, has good intentions, because he loves her. She loves him too, and so she obeys him and stays by his side because she knows her husband is not a villain, but a man who lacks perspective and who believes science, medicine and reason is the answer to all the struggles in life.

On our Literature class we’ve been analysing the story The Yellow Wallpaper by Charlotte Gilman. And we were asked to write an essay based on an aspect discussed in class, but not to write the final conclusion. I worked with Gonzalo Vazquez Avila. Hope you like it!

In the story The Yellow Wallpaper by Charlotte Gilman, John, the husband of the narrator is known to be the villain of the story. Because he, as a ‘physician of high standing’ assures his wife is going through a nervous depression, and locks her up and vetoes her wish to write and relate to other people; because he’s sure this will help her recover. He trapped his wife and left her alone, but only for her to get better. So up to what point is he the villain?

To begin with, we know for certain, that John, through his knowledge as a physician, did what he thought was best for his wife’s health. As the narrator says at the beginning of the story, he was “practical in the extreme”, he believed isolating her wife was the solution so no matter what she said or what she did, he did not let her out of the land. He thought what he was doing was right, and she would eventually get better, but she wasn’t in the slightest; not until she broke free.
Furthermore, we know he cared deeply for his wife’s health and did what he believed was right for her, though he couldn’t help her at all simply because he didn’t think he needed his wife’s opinion, which was his first mistake. He ignored her when she wanted to express herself, “…John would not hear of it”, and told him what she really needed, what she really was going through, but there was no case. Without the point of view of the diseased, it is very difficult to know exactly what goes through that person’s mind and spirit.

Despite this, we must hand it to him, he does shine at some moments and does little things for his wife that he doesn’t know mean so much for her. Like when she tried her best to express her needs but failed when she started crying uncontrollably, and then he “…gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till he tired my head”, he, without the use of medicine, did what was best for his wife. It is in this moments that we come to respect John, and we understand that everything he does, he does for his love.

In contrast, the woman heard what her husband was saying, and realized he was wrong, but decided not to act upon it. She trusted him, and so she fought with herself to get better under the conditions her husband gave her, “he takes all care for me, and so I feel basely ungrateful not to value it more.”, she put up with everything John said because she knew he wanted only the best for her, and so she accepted everything, not being able to go out of the land, not being able to talk to anyone, not being able to write. She loved him, so he stuck to him, even though he was hurting her.

On our Literature class we read the story “The Rain Horse” and then worked on some questions, I worked with Lucila Giambruni.

1. “As the young man came over the hill the first thin blowing rain met him. (…) He shivered holding himself against the cold. …felt nothing but the dullness of feeling nothing. (…) A wave of anger went over him: (…) anger against the land that made him feel so outcast.”

2. “…a thin, black horse was running across the ploughland towards the hill, its head down, neck stretched out. It seemed to be running on its toes like a cat, like a dog up to no good.”

3. In blinding rain he lunged through the barricade of brambles at the wood’s edge.

4.“At the wood top, with the silvered grey light coming in behind it, the black horse was standing under the oaks, its head high and alert, its ears pricked, watching him.”

5. “The black shape was above him, right across the light. (…) …he fell backwards down the bank, and leapt again like a madman, dodging among the oaks… He was well out in the middle of this before he realised that he was running alone. (…) …this last attack had cleared up one thing. He need no longer act like a fool out of mere uncertainty as to whether the horse was simply being playful or not. It was definitely after him. He picked two stones… (…) He began to run. And as he run he heard a deeper sound running with him. He whirled around. The horse was in the middle of the clearing. …coming straight for him. Ge let out a tearing roar and threw the stone… It dropped back (…) He could have killed the horse at that moment (…) …flung the one in his right hand. (…) …and the horse actually stumbled.

8. “He picked two stones about the size of goose eggs” he took the biggest stone he could find, and kept it, in order to defend himself. He didn’t know what the horse was going to do, so he had to be prepared for the worst.

9. “With all his force he threw” “his arm began to ache with the unaccustomed exercise” With this quotations we can realize that this wasn’t a common thing, it’s not that a man usually throws stones at an animal. Because it’s not usual that nature reacts or attacks man. This story portrays a man and nature relationship, in which the man is not the only one presented as a threat. Nature does strike back, as seen in “The Rain Horse”.
10.11. “Keep your distance and you’ll not get hurt” at this point the man was dominating the situation, was superior, and nature was no longer a threat to him. The man used his intelligence, and attacked him back, so that he wouldn’t get hurt.

12. “Like a spike of bone stabbing” the protagonist felt a pain so big, and so profound that it felt like someone was stabbing his bones. He felt a part of him was missing, “cut out of his brain”, and this place made him remember that.